Poll: Hillary could put Texas in play...

[SaveElmer]

Is Texas turning blue? Poll shows Sen. Clinton faring well there

Et tu, Texas?

That just might be the reaction of President Bush to a new poll in the Lone Star State that shows Republicans at risk of losing his home state in the 2008 presidential contest.

Texas hasn't gone Democratic in a presidential race in more than three decades. But the survey shows Republican contender Sen. John McCain essentially tied with Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton among registered voters, with McCain at 36% and Clinton at 35% in a head-to-head contest. Republican Rudy Giuliani and Clinton also are essentially tied, at 32%-31%.

The telephone survey of 1,002 adults was taken from April 26 to May 7 by the Texas Lyceum, a nonpartisan civic group. The margin of error is +/- 3 percentage points. An executive summary of the report, which has been shared with USA TODAY, is due to be posted here later this afternoon.

Democratic Sen. Barack Obama fared less well than Clinton, though more voters were undecided. McCain beat Obama 32%-25%. Giuliani defeated Obama 32%-22%.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2007/06/is_texas_turnin.html

[SaveElmer]

1. And for ZuchZulu...MoE +/- 3%...nt

[pocoloco]

2. LOL

"trust me, Kerry is gonna win in a landslide".

[davidwparker]

33. i was going to comment 'ROTFLMAO', but your comment if fine

Hillary win in TX. She's got more chance winning here in VA and I'm just laughing at those chances.

[Gman]

3. Texas was very much in play in 1996

and Clinton could have taken Texas with some (any) money. Instead we had to buy our own yard signs and bumper stickers.

[Freddie Stubbs]

62. That was with Ross Perot on the ballot

I'm sceptical that it would have been that close without a strong third-party candidate. Remember, not Democrat has one a state-wide election in Texas in over 12 years.

[ronnykmarshall]

4. WHO CARES??

There are SO few young and hip people in that state!

[SaveElmer]

5. Yeah too many old people...they shouldn't even be allowed to vote...

Not hip and cool enough...

:sarcasm:

:rofl:

[ronnykmarshall]

12. and can't fucking TEXT MESSAGE !!!!

[DavidDvorkin]

9. You have heard of the Electoral College, haven't you?

[ronnykmarshall]

10. Parody, baby!

There's an Obama poster around here that slams Hillary supporters over and over as not being "young and hip".

[DavidDvorkin]

32. Ah, I wasn't aware of that

[NMDemDist2]

23. there may be few hip people, but it's got lots of *people people*

every vote counts IMO

[ronnykmarshall]

25. I should add my sarcasm tag ....

Sometimes my smart ass gene takes over too quick!

[BikeWriter]

58. Yes, you're entirely correct on this post.

[BikeWriter]

57. Uhh...

[texastoast]

6. Hell yeah--Et nos! n/t

[Deep13]

7. "Hillary Will Take Your Guns Away!"

They don't need to print new signs. They can just paint "Hillary" over "Dukakis" on the old ones.

I notice the poll did not include either Thompson or Romney. Anyway, I think the only candidate who has a remote shot at turning TX blue is Richardson because he's from the SW and is immune from the aforementioned slogan.

[SaveElmer]

11. Uh...isn't McCain from the Southwest...and doesn't

He oppose gun control?

Doesn't seem to be helpin him much!

[Deep13]

14. Doesn't change the fact that McCain is nuts...

...and everyone knows it. Besides after a smear campaign that points out HRC's pro-gay, pro-choice and anti-gun credentials, I think McCain would beat her there.

[SaveElmer]

17. And Georgeie boy isn't?

Cripes they elected a whacked out neophyte over Ann Richards...

You think McCain is too whacked out for them?

[Deep13]

27. No, I think he would beat just about any D. in TX.

I don't expect TX to go blue.

[benEzra]

48. McCain is regarded as anti-gun/pro-gun-control...

Uh...isn't McCain from the Southwest...and doesn't

He oppose gun control?

Doesn't seem to be helpin him much!

McCain is regarded as anti-gun/pro-gun-control, and briefly served as a spokesperson for an organ of the ban-more-guns lobby, the now-defunct Americans for Gun Safety (the same group that sold the DLC on repeating the 1994 and 2000 mistakes in 2004). After seeing Senator Kerry go down in flames among gun owners in '04 on the "I support hunting, ban nonhunting guns" message, McCain has been giving lip service to gun owners here and there, but I think he's probably just playing both sides of the fence.

[benEzra]

47. She definitely needs to address that issue. Edwards has taken steps in that direction

Hillary Will Take Your Guns Away!"

They don't need to print new signs. They can just paint "Hillary" over "Dukakis" on the old ones.

I notice the poll did not include either Thompson or Romney. Anyway, I think the only candidate who has a remote shot at turning TX blue is Richardson because he's from the SW and is immune from the aforementioned slogan.

She definitely needs to address that issue. Edwards has taken steps in that direction, but I haven't gotten the impression that the Clinton campaign even understands the issue to begin with, and they really need to make the effort, IMHO.


----------
Dems and the Gun Issue - Now What? (written in '04, largely vindicated in '06, IMO)

[Xipe Totec]

8. I like HRC, but doubt that Texas would go for her

not because she's a woman, but because she's now a New Yorker.

[flpoljunkie]

13. Poll out: "Obama does not run as well as Clinton right now because he isn't well known."

The General Election trial ballot numbers show two things. First, support for Clinton is quite strong especially among core Democratic constituencies. Second Obama does not run as well as Clinton right now because he isn't well known. Approximately 40% of voters are undecided in the match-ups featuring Obama.

http://www.texaslyceum.org/media/staticContent/PubCon_Journals/Texas%20Lyceum%20-%20June%2014th%20Poll%20Press%20Release.pdf

[SaveElmer]

15. So they could just as easily go the other way...nt

[flpoljunkie]

16. Dream on!

[SaveElmer]

18. Well...I can imagine your frustration...

He certainly doesn't seem to be making much headway with Democrats...

[flpoljunkie]

36. Am not frustrated a bit. It's still "name-recognition" says Zogby. He's right.

[William769]

20. When is Obama going to become well known?

After the Primaries?

[SaveElmer]

22. I can see the headlines now...

November 6th, 2009

Hillary Clinton Elected 44th President of the United States

Defeats Rudolph Guiliani in Landslide



DU reaction: It's all name recognition



:rofl:

[ieoeja]

28. No, the DU reaction will be more like this.

The activists, political consultants, etc who supported Hillary are crediting her victory to her right-of-center politics. In reality, she won it because most Democrats -- the 99% who are not activists, political consultants, etc -- voted for her in the primary believing she was Liberal. And this election was all about winning the Democratic primary. We could have nominated Gumby for president and still won this election after the debacle of the W administration.

[ronnykmarshall]

29. DU reaction:

[William769]

31. Man there could not be a more perfect answer!

Thanks I needed that!

[Drunken Irishman]

19. Still way too early to be talking about possible match-ups.

These polls are going to change a lot over the next year, so it's silly to put any stock in them today. Hillary might lead in Texas now, but I remember in 2002 reading a poll that suggested Bush might win New York. This time next year will give us a better idea of whether or not Texas is in play. Right now is just far too soon, or I think so anyway.

[jackbourassa]

38. Hillary's not going to win Texas...

She gets less than 33% support and everyone knows her. You honestly thing that the 30% undecideds are going to vote for her? They're undecided because they don't know which Republican to support yet.

Hillary has the support of Democrats, that's true. The Republicans are currently divided. That's why she's even close in this poll. But guess what? The Republicans will eventually nominate someone and the Republican base will rally. You know what will happen then? Hillary will still be at 33%.

Remember Congresswoman Busby?

I can't wait to see the smart-ass comments from Clinton supporters then.

[rinsd]

21. Hillary winning a red state? That's unpossible!

[jobycom]

24. Don't discount the power of accents.

Giuliani sounds and looks really weird down here. He's the stereotypical New York (no offense to New Yorkers, it's just a cultural comfort-level thing) businessman-looking fellow, and that's not popular in Texas. He won't inspire anyone. Plus, he loses the anti-abortion crowd and the family values crowd, and that's what has kept Texas Republican.

McCain is a war hero, so he gets more respect, and he doesn't look New York-ish.

Hillary has a strong, southern-sounding voice, without being abrasive. Like your Aunt Hazel. Her accent isn't very southern, but it is closer than the rest of the field. Plus, we've elected women to the governor's mansion and the Senate, so Texans aren't uncomfortable with a woman leader.

And, there are a lot of Arkansans in Texans. I've met quite a few who say they always vote Republican, but they plan to vote Hillary. I've met some who say that the Clintons were Satan's spawn, too, of course.

So, maybe she can poll well against the Republicans, given their options so far. I have a feeling Fred Thompson would negate her edge, though.

Don't forget, back in the hills and the woods in Texas this is the state that elected Ralph Yarborough, Jim Hightower, and Ann Richards, and produced regional politicians like Barbara Jordan, Sheila Jackson Lee, Henry B. Gonzales, and Mickey Leland. There is a strong strand of populism in rural Texas, and that populism oddly tends toward libertarianism. That's helped the Republicans more than the Dems, but with Republicans calling for runaway spending and more intrusive government, there's a chance it will turn. Also, Austin is liberal, San Antonio and the valley go Democratic usually, and white males are a distinct minority in Texas. Whites are outnumbered by African-Americans and Hispanics, and are quickly on the road to losing their numerical edge to Hispanics, who tend to vote Democrat in Texas more than Republican. Also, immigration will be big with Hispanics, and the xenophobia of the Republican candidates will offend many, and not just Hispanic voters.

Given Hillary's predicted edge with women voters, the demographics make it interesting.

And no, I don't think she will win here. But if she's the nominee, I'll do as much as I can to make it fun. :)

[xkenx]

26. Texas Democratic Committee knew something by inviting Wes Clark

to keynote their state convention last summer before the 2006 election. And Clark was the most requested surrogate in red states. Clark is the one who can flip red states, including possibly Texas. The perceptions of red state voters are interesting: The more moderate Hillary is perceived as a flaming liberal. The more progressive Clark is viewed through the prism of his war hero/military general status as being more moderate. Wes Clark is a progressive wolf in military sheep's uniform. That is what can flip red states, not name recognition polling 9 months out from the primaries, and 18 months out from the GE. By definition, a red state has more Rs than Ds. To flip one requires that we hold our base, win Is, and make some inroads among Rs. I am in contact with enough DEM WOMEN who are, at best, lukewarm to HRC. Does anyone seriously think that Hillary gets any Rethug male votes? And Rethug women vote with their husbands. Do the electoral math folks! Hillary doesn't flip red states. Does she even hold NH, PA, WI for Dems?

[ElizabethDC]

30. I kind of doubt if any of our candidates can turn Texas blue

but it would be nice, for sure!

[NoPasaran]

34. Maybe yes, maybe no

But simply to be considered "in play" instead of being written off would be a huge difference.

[benny05]

49. Texas will be a tough one that's fer sure

But if you go read the Burnt Orange Report, the readers there seem to like John Edwards. Edwards out-raised all Dems in Texas the first Q. Chris Bell has endorsed Edwards, and so has Kirk Watson. Jim Hightower said Edwards was the most progressive candidate thus for.

http://www.burntorangereport.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3660

[Tejanocrat]

35. FYI, none of the candidates are campaigning in Texas yet (fund-raising for money to spend elsewhere,

yes, campaigning, no).

As a result, I'm not sure what that poll was measuring, but it's not measuring how well the candidates' campaigns are winning over voters here in Texas because not a single TV spot, mailer, door-hanger, yard-sign, billboard, or radio piece has come into Texas yet.

[benny05]

50. Are you sure about that?

http://www.burntorangereport.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3660

[Tejanocrat]

53. Edwards's "Small Change for Big Change" was close, but it was still a fund-raiser ("small change")

[benny05]

60. Small fundraisers are campaigns as well

And I think I read Obama also visited Austin and thousands turned out to see him.

[Tejanocrat]

64. Hillary and Richardson have been to Texas, too. I meant campaign events independent of fund-raisers

My point is that any poll numbers for Edwards, HRC, and Obama are not a reliable measure of how well their campaigns are reaching their target audiences because they are not campaigning in Texas yet (apart from campaign events tied to fund-raising efforts).

[Elidor]

37. Fucking hilarious

Not a chance in hell. A delusional conclusion.

[Texas_Kat]

39. Laugh of the day

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[mckeown1128]

40. BS!!!

No democratic candidate can win Texas not Clinton not Obama not Edwards....it is not going to happen!

[Tejanocrat]

41. "Poll: Hillary could put Texas in play..." For who? The Constitutional Law Party? Surely not us.

[JohnLocke]

42. LOL (nt).

[Awsi Dooger]

43. I saw this today on my first visit to HillaryHub

They had it plastered as the first link on the news column. I damn near broke my computer chair while spinning around. :rofl:

Every cycle on DU we get many posts claiming progress in Texas and Georgia. I know you have to fight in those states and I don't want to discourage anyone, but a little bit of rational analysis would be nice. At least this is from a source, not a thread out of the blue claiming we'll win in Texas.

[saltpoint]

44. It would be a scream if George W. Bush was such a cretinous

embarrassment to Texans that they'd turn their electoral votes over to the Democratic ticket in 08. A big party at my house if it happens.

But I still think it's a long shot, no matter who's on our ticket.

[dionysus]

45. if you really believe Hillary can flip texas, you've been

sniffing way too much glue...

[Politicub]

46. Hillary leads with people in my family

Out of the current crop of dem frontrunners, Hillary is the one that my mom and dad like most. Interestingly, my grandmother, who normally supports the GOP, also likes Hillary.

While I have Hillary as my avatar, I'm also impressed Obama and Edwards (and of course, Gore!!). We are fortunate to have a great slate of dem candidates in the primaries.

[w4rma]

51. If this is true then Edwards is likely already winning Texas. (nt)

[mnhtnbb]

55. Poll did NOT question Edwards against any Repubs, yet in Rasmussen

he beats all Repub contenders.

What are they afraid of finding out in Texas?

[bearfan454]

52. Diebod will take care of that. nt

[ce qui la baise1]

54. I would love to see that, just for the message it

would send to the right.

[sampsonblk]

56. If the GOP has to spend $ in TX, we are in great shape!

They haven't had to worry about Texas in a long time. If they have to spend time and money in Texas, that is great for us. It may not matter so much who we nominate. What matters is that they run a competent, determined campaign.

[rinsd]

61. Bingo, simply forcing them to waste resources in TX is a win (nt)

[BikeWriter]

59. One point, Hillary does not play well among Texas Conservatives...

who I know. Yes, we've had one uppity woman Governor here, but Hillary is not Ann Richards!

[Radical Activist]

63. When is the Texas primary again?

Hillary is going to do better in all the polls of later primary states where people haven't gotten the chance to examine all the candidates as closely as the early primary states have. That's also why national polls are meaningless.

I also noticed that McCain gets 36% against Hillary but only 32% against Obama. There are a lot of undecided with Obama. People there don't know him as well as Hillary yet. The poll doesn't tell us much more than that.

[tammywammy]

65. OMG

I think that's the funniest thing I have heard today. :rofl: